no, the first post shows he updated it. ya, no relax... maybe ask him for the source code so you can make the changes? or offer to pay him?
s On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Sebastien Sterling < [email protected]> wrote: > Yes i have seen this before, however it is only for 32 bit ? i still think > it is impressive, but it doesn't have the most important tool the relax > tool, the one tool that would complete mudbox... so they horde it as a maya > exclusive... > > > On 9 May 2013 01:07, Steven Caron <[email protected]> wrote: > >> for the time being... >> >> LivePaint - Ahmidou >> http://www.si-community.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=1735 >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Sebastien Sterling < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> yes building ice in maya does sound excessively enterprising, which is >>> why i asked if it would be doable as supposed to viable. i'm much more >>> interested in a simple artisan tool counterpart for softimage >>> there would be a nice place for it, right on the shelf beneath the >>> weight painting tooles :P >>> >>> >>> On 8 May 2013 23:58, Alan Fregtman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Code in html? They don't do the browser plugin anymore. >>>> >>>> You're right about the other things as far as I know though. Write a >>>> tool in Fabric and it's usable from Maya and Softimage. Their hair system >>>> example is essentially an example of that. Their viewport integration seems >>>> to be cross-platform. >>>> >>>> They have painting samples already, and a brush API, so it's not so far >>>> fetched to make an artisan tools clone if you were so inclined, and can >>>> code. >>>> >>>> An ICE clone? That's harder. :p >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Sebastien Sterling < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Apologies for resurrecting this topic, only i was chatting to our >>>>> character fx supervisor about Fabric, and it got me thinking, would it be >>>>> possible to create something like ice in fabric engine, but for maya? i >>>>> mean possible, not viable, i don't want to see ice in maya, i was just >>>>> wondering what are the limits, it sounds like an sdk away from home, could >>>>> one make deformers operators, could you make a version of artisan sculpt >>>>> tools for softimage with deformers linked to brushes ? would it all have >>>>> to >>>>> happen in a second interface, or is there a way of integrating it >>>>> seamlessly with what is already there in maya and softimages UI, also i >>>>> was >>>>> told that you can code in html and the KL core does the heavy lifting is >>>>> this right ? sorry again if any of this in inacurate >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 20 April 2013 21:02, Paul Doyle <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Don't get me wrong - Yeti is great software, and the guys at >>>>>> Peregrine are very smart. I was just responding to the comments about >>>>>> Fabric :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 20 April 2013 13:33, Sebastien Sterling < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello Paul, i have in fact seen the demo for the hair module, and in >>>>>>> general the fabric engine looks amazing, up until now i was under the >>>>>>> impression it was going to be some external application that would >>>>>>> instance >>>>>>> things back into softimage or maya, i was not aware that you intended to >>>>>>> integrate it into both applications, i'm curious and very eager to see >>>>>>> what >>>>>>> this might look like :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the thing i like with yeti after having seen it in action is the >>>>>>> interaction model is really solid, you have a node based editor to build >>>>>>> your simulation tree where your setting live like ice, but you can also >>>>>>> come in and comb and tweek the guides manually, its also really cleaver >>>>>>> about instancing. more to the point its very specifically built for >>>>>>> "artists" to create production quality hair. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 20 April 2013 18:15, Paul Doyle <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Just to clarify - the Creation >>>>>>>> modules<http://fabricengine.com/creation-modules/>are designed to be >>>>>>>> much more 'out of the box' than the Creation Platform >>>>>>>> itself (which, as you rightly say, is a tool for building tools). >>>>>>>> Right now >>>>>>>> we're focused on modules for locomotion/crowds (Horde), scene assembly >>>>>>>> (Stage) and vegetation (Flora). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tufty (the hair module) is on hold at the moment but we'll pick it >>>>>>>> up again later this year (sooner if someone wants us to build them a >>>>>>>> hair >>>>>>>> system). When it's made available it will provide out of the box >>>>>>>> functionality, and run standalone as well as inside Maya and Softimage >>>>>>>> (which I think is a pretty good attempt at " its nice to have a >>>>>>>> production ready out of the box solution identical and compatible >>>>>>>> everywhere in the world"). The preview >>>>>>>> video<https://vimeo.com/51762811>that we released last year already >>>>>>>> showed a viable workflow - we just want >>>>>>>> to do a lot more with it before we release anything. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 20 April 2013 11:54, Sebastien Sterling < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> i would have thought the more third party willing to develop on >>>>>>>>> softimage platform the better, yes the fabric engine looks really >>>>>>>>> promising, but its still not a "solution" its a tool designed to >>>>>>>>> create >>>>>>>>> other tools, as powerful a tool it is to a TD or coder, in this >>>>>>>>> instance >>>>>>>>> its like replacing ice with something even more sophisticated and >>>>>>>>> specialised, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To give you another example, i don't know if any of you have seen >>>>>>>>> the Psyop ruffle feather engine, that is ice based and amazing, but i >>>>>>>>> can't >>>>>>>>> create somthing like that, we can't all go away for a year or 2 and >>>>>>>>> become >>>>>>>>> TD's in order to build our own little feather systems in ice, >>>>>>>>> sometimes its >>>>>>>>> nice to have a production ready out of the box solution identical and >>>>>>>>> compatible everywhere in the world. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 20 April 2013 12:48, Nick Angus <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Have you had a look at fabric engines vimeo page? They have >>>>>>>>>> started a fur package probably more as a tech demo at this stage, >>>>>>>>>> but they >>>>>>>>>> may be planning to complete it as a full package. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It would of course be maya/soft compatible, and you know its good >>>>>>>>>> if Helge Mathee had anything to do with it! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> N >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows Phone >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>> From: Sebastien Sterling <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: 19/04/2013 7:26 PM >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Yeti for Softimage >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello List. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I just wanted to perform a quick survey of what solutions people >>>>>>>>>> are using for hair/fur/feathers in softimage these days. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> recently a new tool has become available on the market, its a >>>>>>>>>> production ready all in one hair/feather solution. it's called Yeti >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://peregrinelabs.com/yeti/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The hair module in softimage doesn't seem to have aged well, and >>>>>>>>>> i know what a lot of you are thinking, ice already gives us a >>>>>>>>>> multitude of >>>>>>>>>> ways to develop hair solutions... However, there doesn't seem to be >>>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>> universal go to hair solution for softimage. this can be a problem >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> numerous reasons. and as good as ice is, it's short comings can't be >>>>>>>>>> ignored (ex: styling tools?) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I wrote an email to Peregrine asking if there where any plans >>>>>>>>>> for a port to XSI, they responded as follows: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Sebastien, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the great feedback - we have investigated Yeti >>>>>>>>>> integration for rendering preview which may be available in a later >>>>>>>>>> version >>>>>>>>>> but at this time we're not planning an XSI version of the editing >>>>>>>>>> tools. >>>>>>>>>> Adding in support for a whole new 3D application is a large task >>>>>>>>>> and we >>>>>>>>>> haven't had enough demand for an XSI version at this stage. If at >>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>> point that changes and it looks like a studio may commit to a large >>>>>>>>>> number >>>>>>>>>> of licenses we could afford to do this. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So yes, i guess I'm asking who would like Yeti to come to >>>>>>>>>> softimage, and if Not, why? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> good day :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
